Two horror films for the price of one

Rating: 10/10 (23 November 2014)

It's pretty much taken for granted that '28 Days Later' is a seminal British horror film. And it is. It helped revitalise the 'zombie genre' by making the undead into more than just - George Romero-style - 'shufflers.' It also started a trend in 'disaster movies' showing well-known locations (in this case London) eerily deserted.
Everyman, Jim, wakes up from a coma to find a disease has spread through Britain turning everyone into zombies (or the 'infected' if we're being technical, as they're still alive). Now he must look for survivors and stay one step ahead of the psychotic enemy.
You'll find not many people will say anything too negative about 28 Days Later. It's actually pretty good from beginning to end. However, there is a distinct change of tone midway through the film that does seem to grate on even the most die-hard of fans. It's like two horror films stuck together. The second could be completely independent to the first.
However, both halves have their merits. The first half is creepy and sets the tone for a different type of ending that what's to come. The second half is more action-orientated and the infected (of which have been the bad guys during the first half) seem to take a back seat to human adversaries.
But no matter how much the change annoys you, the acting is still fine, the sets terrifically creepy, the characters charming enough for us to care about their fates and the direction - naturally - slick, courtesy of Danny Boyle.
All in all, this is a British classic horror that has spawned numerous inferior imitations. If you like your horror gritty, then this one is for you.